|
Advance Magazine Stats Discussion - August 2002TAS : Advance Magazine Stats Discussion - August 2002
From: Cerridwen (anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org )
Subject: AOLA stats July 2002
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Date: 2002-08-21 10:07:19 PST
NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name
above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify
the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail.
This data is gleaned from Advance Magazines
Issue 156 circa Dec 2001
Issue 157 circa Jan 2002
Issue 158 circa April 2002
Issue 159 circa July 2002
Important note: These issues are always a few months behind. July
2002 issue is actually reporting on completions from 2 to 3 months
earlier.
AOLA stats 156 157 158 159
M1 Word Clearing 0 0 0 0
Scn Drug Rundown 1 0 0 0
Happiness RD Auditing 0 1 3 0
NED Drug Rundown 1 0 2 0
NED Case Completion 1 0 2 1
Grade V Power 0 0 2 1
Grade VA Power 1 0 3 1
The State of Clear 12 10 8 12
The Clearing Course 2 0 0 0
Sunshine RD auditing 13 10 8 12
Solo Auditor Part 1 31 16 27 37
Solo Certainty Course 12 3 30 6
OT Preparations 20 12 0 59
Solo Auditor Part II 38 37 21 60
OT Eligibility 33 21 34 60
R6EW 2 1 4 7
New OT 1 32 50 46 63
OT II 19 36 56 76
OT III 16 29 40 70
OT III Expanded 0 4 1 0
New OT IV 9 15 26 73
New OT V 15 18 17 50
OT Doctorate Course 2 2 0 5
Ext. and the Phenomena
of Space Course 0 1 0 2
Hubbard Key to Life 0 1 2 0
Life Orientation 0 1 3 1
Hubbard Specialist
of Standard Tech 0 0 0 1
Totals 260 268 335 597
The stats at AOLA are definitely up.
Now before anyone starts howling that they are all false, I have to
tell you that this data is obtained by a hand count of completions.
The time periods between Mags (Issues 157, 158 and 159)
are spread out evenly so it's not as if they are stacking the numbers
That wouldn't work anyway as I am wise to that deception.
What I think you may be seeing here is a "backlog" at
the AOLA that finally got handled. This means that there
were quite a few Clears and OT's sitting in the LA field that could
easily have been gotten back onto service.
If you look at the OT Ambassador goals for 2002 you will see that
handling this "backlog" was a major priority.
This trend may last for another few months and the next
Advance Mag stats may show a continued increase but I kind of doubt it.
Reports from Tory say that a recent visit to L. Ron Hubbard Way show a
very non active street. I think the "easy" starts were put through the
Scn mill and we are going to see a steady decline of OT's made.
I'll keep you posted.
--
Cerridwen
Lurking Scientologists start here:
http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats.htm
From: WazNScn (waznscn@aol.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-21 10:25:27 PST >What I think you may be seeing here is a "backlog" at >the AOLA that finally got handled. This means that there >were quite a few Clears and OT's sitting in the LA field that could >easily have been gotten back onto service. I am of the opinion that they are pushing people up the bridge. It makes the stats look better and it keeps people on the lower end of the bridge happy. There were too many stalled and people on the bridge were beginning to look at the never-ending/non-progressing bridge and not be so thrilled. I know someone that spent MONTHS recently on OT 1 and then got through OT 3 in a matter of a couple of weeks. Considering that it is all BTs from OT 3 on -- what does it really matter???! From: Deomorto (deomorto@my-deja.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-22 00:43:26 PST "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message [b556547b650bcd0529a238ae0fcd9589@anonymous.poster] ... > NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name > above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify > the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. > > This data is gleaned from Advance Magazines > > Issue 156 circa Dec 2001 > Issue 157 circa Jan 2002 > Issue 158 circa April 2002 > Issue 159 circa July 2002 > > Important note: These issues are always a few months behind. July > 2002 issue is actually reporting on completions from 2 to 3 months > earlier. Thanks Cerri - your usual great job - I actually have something I wanted to comment on so bear with me.. > > > AOLA stats 156 157 158 159 > snippage... > > Grade V Power 0 0 2 1 > > Grade VA Power 1 0 3 1 > > The State of Clear 12 10 8 12 > > The Clearing Course 2 0 0 0 > > Sunshine RD auditing 13 10 8 12 Nothing much changed in the quarterly stats here - now it starts to get a bit more intriguing > > Solo Auditor Part 1 31 16 27 37 > > Solo Certainty Course 12 3 30 6 Ok they have been maintaining a certain amount of solo auditor course delivery > > OT Preparations 20 12 0 59 and this is very interesting - 0 OT Preps for a quarter? What that says is that they had no auditors for this at all - what I would suspect from this is that a) They had some severe refund problems 3 quarters ago - I do know they have had problems with a couple of type 3s just prior to that b) during the period of no OT preps completions the auditors and C/Ses were getting firmly beaten around the head and retreaded - possibly a coupla RPFings? c) They have had a delivery mission in the org for the last quarter once the auditors were gotten back into delivery. > > Solo Auditor Part II 38 37 21 60 > > OT Eligibility 33 21 34 60 > > R6EW 2 1 4 7 > > New OT 1 32 50 46 63 > > OT II 19 36 56 76 > > OT III 16 29 40 70 > > OT III Expanded 0 4 1 0 > > New OT IV 9 15 26 73 > > New OT V 15 18 17 50 Hmm these are very strange stats - what it looks like is that they had 45 people or so start Solo Auditor part II and stay through OT V - almost as if they were one group. The reason I say that is that they have very little completions on anything else - unless you have left some stuff out. Without access to any info on what or where these came from I would suspect that these were org or mission staff using up awards - it looks very strange, I know from running an AO how hard it can be to run people through the solo>OT 1- III, OT IV and V - it would be very unusual indeed . In order to produce the amount of IV and V comps the HGC in the AO would have been having to deliver around 635 WDAHs per week - compared to their previous delivery of 220 per week. That would take adding 10 full time NOTs auditors at once at the beginning of the quarter. not sure if you will ever get the chance to check on it cerri but if you do ever get around there it would be interesting to find out what happened. As I said - I suspect something strange and out of the ordinary - it doesn;t look like they were building up to it and it just doesn;t happen that way. I know. > > Totals 260 268 335 597 > > The stats at AOLA are definitely up. > > Now before anyone starts howling that they are all false, I have to > tell you that this data is obtained by a hand count of completions. I don;t think they are false at all - but I doubt sincerely that it is an indicator of great public delivery. But I could be wrong . As I said above - the figures look like a block of completions of some kind. ...some snippage > This trend may last for another few months and the next > Advance Mag stats may show a continued increase but I kind of doubt it. It doesn;t look like a trend Cerri - it looks like a demographic "bulge" for want of a better word. > > Reports from Tory say that a recent visit to L. Ron Hubbard Way show a > very non active street. I think the "easy" starts were put through the > Scn mill and we are going to see a steady decline of OT's made. That would tend to back up the hypothesis that it is one group - if that is the case it would make the HGC scheduling and auditing for Ot IV and V much easier indeed. If you have seen the list of comps of OT IV and V maybe there is a clue there? > > I'll keep you posted. Please do!! deo From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-22 03:25:40 PST "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message [b556547b650bcd0529a238ae0fcd9589@anonymous.poster] ... [snip] > What I think you may be seeing here is a "backlog" at > the AOLA that finally got handled. This means that there > were quite a few Clears and OT's sitting in the LA field that could > easily have been gotten back onto service. Another thing that you may be seeing, which I've noticed from completions lists that have been published lately on ARS from Flag and the Advanced Orgs, is that people who were at a higher level are being retreaded through the lower levels. Guys who were supposedly OT III in the 80s or 90s are being audited on NED, attesting to Clear, etc. It sounds like part of the whole thing on "false F/Ns" also includes "false attests." People, rightly or wrongly, are being made to do their lower grade chart over again. > Reports from Tory say that a recent visit to L. Ron Hubbard Way show a > very non active street. I think the "easy" starts were put through the > Scn mill and we are going to see a steady decline of OT's made. > > I'll keep you posted. On some other part of this thread, someone said that they believe that the public and staff are probably not permitted to walk around outside. This sounds right to me. It may be a result of demonstrations and pickets that have been done in the past. From: Cerridwen (anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-22 06:11:24 PST NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. "Deomorto" [deomorto@my-deja.com] wrote in message news:cde9ed89.0208212343.b31b962@posting.google.com... > If you have seen the list of comps of OT IV and V maybe there is a > clue there? > Hi Deo, Here is the complete list that goes with the last column of stats. AOLA COMPLETIONS ISSUE 159 [circa July 2002] HUBBARD SPECIALIST OF STANDARD TECH [1] Martine Gann HUBBARD LIFE ORIENTATION COURSE [1] Chuck Modrich NED CASE COMPLETION [1] Jackie Handlin POWER PROCESSING [1] Lisa Lashaway POWER PLUS PROCESSING [1] Lisa Lashaway CLEAR [12] Sisel Lan Kay Proctor Tom Salmon Norm Taylor Erick Whittier Bonnie O'Malley Anita Van Hill Meredith Finely Steve Marshall Nancy Sanders Darrell Craig Jay Weinstein SUNSHINE RUNDOWN [12] Sisel Lan Kay Proctor Tom Salmon Norm Taylor Erick Whittier Bonnie O'Malley Anita Van Hill Meredith Finely Steve Marshall Nancy Sanders Darrell Craig Jay Weinstein SOLO I [37] Sara Kras Sarah Paradise Joe Kras Josh Gerson Maricela Perry Victoria Silver David Horwedell John Walters Maureen Nolan Stuart Tuttle Al Green Eric Petz Ted Prescott Adam Daniells Bud Hayes Lee Anne DeVette Edwardo Zuluaga Amy Walker Jennifer Watari Mary Lynn Mancinelli Lori Bryenton Amber Cohen Pat Anderson Steve Hechtman Anja Olsen Tony Balecha Marc Bosserman David Amsalem Gary Jordan Vanessa Pool Randy Pearce Heather Toszer Lourdes Collado Tom Sherman Tanya Reinhart Amanda Winger Roch LeFrancois SOLO CERTAINTY [6] Bob Imhoff Trish Walker Marcie Todd Peggy Ann Rolf Mary Michalak Mark Kimura OT PREPS [59] Mark Isham Casey Curry Randy Pearce Robin Sehy Bob Imhoff Sarah Paradise Terri Castillo Mary Tinney Bob Pierce Victoria Silver Scott D'Amora Jackie Handlin Sara Callahan Natalie Hagemo Susie Pratt Penny Nemode Eric Brownstone Bob O'Brien Sara Kras Margaret MacCarthy John Moore Toni Tinkleman Monica Johnson Stuart Tuttle Clark Carr Nancy Master Mary Michalak Debbie Hurtado Terri Amsalem Todd Woodruff Peggy Ann Rolf Jed Wolf Joan Rae Bob Nebeker Chris Eastwood Robert Hogg Lisa Lashaway Marc Bosserman Sylvia Tangradi Leah Schmiedeke Amanda Winger Tom Gillotte Lindsey Bartilson Leah Remini Erin Holt Paul Mullinger Kathy Korb Steve Hechtman Mark Speros Laura Silvestro Mark Drake Robert Moore Sarah Baxter Neal Fox Karen Todd Frank Suarez Blue Monroe Don Thompson Blanca Hammett SOLO COURSE PART II [60] Dave McKevitt Shiela Jindela Tina Nowlin Paul O'Malley David LaRose Vicki Atlasman Sarah Paradise Daniel LeRiche Josh Fair Jay Weinstein Bonnie O'Malley Casey Curry Maricela Perry Bob Pierce Natalie Hagemo Lee Rogers Maureen Nolan John Walters Victoria Silver Sara Callahan Linda Rickey Sara Kras Renee McKinstry Adva Avni Susie Pratt Ted Prescott Stuart Tuttle Jane Millan Todd Woodruff Margaret MacCarthy Lee Anne DeVette Eric Petz Lori Bryenton David Horwedell Peggy Ann Rolf Mary Lyn Mancinelli Herb Talbutt Bob Imhoff Kim Marino Steve Hechtman Chris Eastwood Mary Michalak Mark Isham Marc Bosserman Tony Balecha Leah Remini Elizabeth McCollum Matt Prados Sylvia Tangradi Mark Kimura Lisa Lashaway Lourdes Collado Terry Stackwood Betsy Suvak David Amsalem Erin Holt Karen Todd Amanda Winger Gary Jordan Mark Speros OT ELIGIBILITY [60] Jane Santangelo Debbie Edwards John Conforti RG Kanning Neil Briggs Nathan Herrell Dave McKevitt Alan Weidlich Vicki Atlasman Bill Hoffman David LaRose Shiela Jindela Sarah Paradise Tina Nowlin Tina McGurk Tim Edwards Jackie Handlin Darrell Bischoff Case Curry Keith Clark Bob Pierce Pat Brandt Maricela Perry Debbie Bredeweg Victoria Silver Sara Callahan Rebecca Cusano Steve Marshall Stuart Tuttle Trish Walker Shauna Pratt Lee Rogers Clay McBride Ted Prescott Sara Kras Jan Millan Susie Pratt Lee Ann DeVette Margaret MacCarthy Eric Petz Peggy Ann Rolf Kim Marino Grace Ting Bob Imhoff Chris Eastwood Marya Berke Mary Michalak Sherry Dewane Sanjeev Naikawadi Tony Balecha Elizabeth McCollum Lynn Oakes Sylvia Tangradi Dan Valcek Mark Kimura Betsy Suvak Karen Todd Mark Isham Erin Holt Leah Remini R6EW [7] Eric Whittier Anita Van Hill Adva Avni Darrell Craig Jay Weinstein Bonnie O'Malley Clay McBride OT 1 [63} Adriana Zuluaga Perez Ron Hatteberg William Wesch Derry MacMahon Eric Salmon Dee Barber Steve Nye Rudi C. Loehwing Angie Beghe Lisa Benest Virgina Lindstrom Rick Murken John Conforti Dave McKevitt Nate Herrell Neil Briggs Dana Haigney Gene Snead Paul O'Malley Jane Santangelo Bill Hoffman Sarah Paradise RG Kanning Shiela Jindela Kay Proctor Danny Del Bono Tina Nowlin Maricela Perry Vicki Atlasman Jane Hunter Rebecca Cusano David LaRose Tom Salmon Daniel LeRiche Casey Curry Pat Brandt Franco Bernardi Bob Pierce Keith Clark Ted Prescott Stuart Tuttle Sara Callahan Victoria Silver Tim Edwards Linda Rickey Trish Walker John Walkers Lori Bryenton Sara Kras Eric Whittier Norma Taylor Susie Pratt Dee Scott Kim Marino Margaret MacCarthy Meredith Finely Steve Boyd Bonnie O'Malley Steve Hechtman Peggy Ann Rolf Steve Marshall Mary Lynn Mancinelli Eric Petz OT II [76] Darren Bloch M Juge Rick Dawson Stan Bartilson Don Meuse Ron Salat Mike Carlson Anna Terrian Robi Selmier Cass Darmody Bill Hamel Christin Edwards Greg Taylor Dawn Darling Derry MacMahon Lorraine Feather Jason Dohring Adriana Zuluaga Perez Jodie Bohte William Wesch Eric Salmon Brenda Butler Dawn Chaban Klaus Hilgers Ron Hatteberg Karen Reed Christopher Smith Ray Edwards Eduardo Garcia Diane Peloquin Tracee Nichols Gene Snead Steve Nye Carol Espinoza John Conforti Dave McKevitt Nate Herrell Paige Long Rudi C. Loehwing Vicki Shantz Neil Briggs Virginia Lindstrom Jill Wilner Gene Snead Lisa Benest Sally Leufven Paul O‘Malley Shiela Jindela Rick Murken Sarah Paradise Larry Apers Danny Del Bono Jane Santangelo Bill Hoffman Angie Beghe Tom Salmon Maricela Perry Kay Proctor Rebecca Cusano Tina Nowlin RG Kanning Bob Pierce Casey Curry Rod Daniells Vicki Atlasman Pat Brant Dana Haigney Lori Bryenton Stuart Tuttle Dee Barber Jan Hunter Ted Prescott Keith Clark Victoria Silver Eric Whitter Linda Rickey OT III [70] Eva Moxon Denise Stickles Craig Beutler Dwight Benesh Collette Williams Tyler Fisk Kyle Mahler Marsi Olson Kirk Rogers Tess Grazier Richard Zudis Beverly Mitchell Pat Mara Derik Johnson Nancy Olson Kat Brady Irene Minken Stan Gabelein Bryn Wesch Louise Alepins Anna Roberts Lee Jordan Mike Carlson Richard Dawson Bobby Wiggins Kate Davis Derry MacMahon Ron Salat Carol Crest Joe Dolce Robin Selmier Alan Eames Adam Walker Don Meuse Robert Cruz Neil Green Lee Borth Frances Santos Lorraine Feather Adriana Zuluaga Perez William Wesch Donna Byrd Dylan Code Annette McCullough Jan Santangelo Virginia Lindstrom Rita Pollock Steve Nye Ray Edwards Brian Coyle William Hamel Dave McKevitt Tom Salmon Lisa Benest Nate Herrell John Conforti Greg Taylor Gene Snead Danny Del Bono Darren Bloch Bill Hoffman Sarah Paradise Shiela Jindela Ron Hatteberg Jason Dohring LaVonna Bledsoe Rebecca Cusano Paul O'Malley Tina Nowlin Jill Wilner OT IV [73] Richard Dixon Tracie Jerling Pat Yau Craig Beutler Trish Bass Larry Monroe Michael Duff Joe Francis Melinda Brownstone Harry Werner Beverly Mitchell Dawn Armondo Kyle Mahler Todd Lucht Marsi Olson Marisol Nichols Cartney Wearn Tony Louw Collette Williams Danny Chadwell Darrell Bischoff Irene Minken Alan Weidlich Stan Gabelein Paul Maselli Linda Harrison Nancy Olson Steve Carlson Sharon Sovinski Denise Stickles Kirk Rogers Kat Brady Joni Bosserman Debbie Gluck Bryn Wesch Mike Reitman Richard Dawson Robin Selmeir Derry MacMahon Don Meuse Ron Salat Mike Carlson Lee Jordan Bobby Wiggins Robert Cruz Kate Davis Lorraine Feather William Wesch Jenny Good Jose Sandoval Adriana Zuluaga Perez Edith Reuveni Virginia Lindstrom Annette McCullough John Seuer Joe Dolce Grace Ting Bill McCaffrey Dave McKevitt Tom Salmon Steve Nye Frances Santos Cathy Whitmore Ray Edwards John Conforti Greg Taylor Danny Del Bono Bill Hoffman Jane Santangelo Ron Hatteberg Nate Herrell Sarah Paradise Shiela Jindela OT V [50] Robert Worlock Alan Nikitan Nola Aronson Stephanie Cary Jan Foote Norma La Rocca Morgan Mariani Sharon Fry Mike Bredeweg Jenna Elfman Linda La Rose Pam McKinnis Paul Renton Cynthia Dolce Steve Johnson Kevin Rush Annie Palmer Anne Archer Debbie Edwards Pat Yau Jackie Handlin Steve Spacher Georgia Clark Michael Duff Tina McGurk Joe Francis Connie Black Kyle Mahler Debbie Bredeweg Tracie Jerling Alan Weidlich Craig Beutler Marsi Olson Bryn Wesch Steve Di Paoli Derry MacMahon Ron Salat Hedy Oliver Susan Lewis Kate Davis Don Meuse Steve Carlson Mike Carlson Brian Luckman Moira Dolan Jim Jerling William Wesch Annette McCullough Darrell Bischoff Virginia Lindstrom OT DOCTORATE COURSE [5] Cherie Connor Shahab Emrani Georgia Clark Marti Marshall Dave Tourje EXTERIORIZATION AND THE PHENOMENA OF SPACE CRS [2] Jeff Sriver Sherry Dewane From: Kristi Wachter (humanrights@racerrecords.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-22 22:28:12 PST Many thanks for the latest stats, Cerridwen! I have added them to my Scientology Statistics project ( http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats/advancestats.html ). I'll update the analysis once I've got a bit more data. So Mark Isham is getting ready to go OT? I figured he was well into the OT levels by now. Appreciatively, Kristi -- Kristi Wachter the activist formerly known as "Jour" (before $cientology outed me) If I am not who you say I am, then you are not who you think you are. - James Baldwin I think $cientology is hurting people and breaking the law, and I want them to stop it. See http://www.scientology-lies.com for more. KSW: http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/alteringtech.htm From: ladayla (ladayla_member@newsguy.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-24 11:35:37 PST In article [3d65c7e8@news2.lightlink.com], Kristi says... > >Many thanks for the latest stats, Cerridwen! > >I have added them to my Scientology Statistics project >( http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats/advancestats.html ). >I'll update the analysis once I've got a bit more data. > >So Mark Isham is getting ready to go OT? I figured he was well into the OT >levels by now. >Appreciatively, There's something screwy about the completion lists. I've been seeing Nancy Olsen's name on completion lists since the early '80s. She's completed everything on the 'bridge' several times, including the OT levels. Clay McBride was OT7 in the 80's and they've got him down as an R6EW completion. (R6EW is Grade 6, a level before Clear). Either they are trying to drive people away by out-tech, or they are trying to kill them. Maybe they are re-researching psychosis, and need to drive some people crazy. la From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-25 03:50:09 PST ladayla [ladayla_member@newsguy.com] wrote in message [ak8hto0s3o@drn.newsguy.com] ... > In article [3d65c7e8@news2.lightlink.com], Kristi says... > > > >Many thanks for the latest stats, Cerridwen! > > > >I have added them to my Scientology Statistics project > >( http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats/advancestats.html ). > >I'll update the analysis once I've got a bit more data. > > > >So Mark Isham is getting ready to go OT? I figured he was well into the OT > >levels by now. > >Appreciatively, > > There's something screwy about the completion lists. I've been seeing Nancy > Olsen's name on completion lists since the early '80s. She's completed > everything on the 'bridge' several times, including the OT levels. I've mentioned this a couple of times, too. I think it's been decided that a lot of people who did their OT Levels didn't actually attain their lower levels to begin with. So they are being sent back to their lower grades and made to redo them. For the most part, I'm sure it's that people were allowed to do their OT Levels when they weren't actually Clear. When you consider the Dianetic Clear craze of the 70s where people were attesting to Clear all over the place, including saying they were a "natural Clear," it's not too surprising this would happen later on down the road. > Clay McBride was OT7 in the 80's and they've got him down as an R6EW > completion. (R6EW is Grade 6, a level before Clear). Either they are trying to > drive people away by out-tech, or they are trying to kill them. Maybe they are > re-researching psychosis, and need to drive some people crazy. > > la R6EW is part of the alternate Clear route, which is for people who didn't go Clear on Dianetics. I guess it was decided that he actually wasn't Clear and has to go Clear this way. From: Deomorto (deomorto@my-deja.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-24 09:08:32 PST "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message [77437396b107c106e5b1316cca653f62@anonymous.poster] ... > NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name > above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify > the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. > > > "Deomorto" [deomorto@my-deja.com] wrote in message > news:cde9ed89.0208212343.b31b962@posting.google.com ... > > > If you have seen the list of comps of OT IV and V maybe there is a > > clue there? > > > > Hi Deo, > > Here is the complete list that goes with the last column of > stats. Sheesh Cerri you need to be careful, the int data Bureau is going to be looking to recruit you! Thank you for additional data! And - thank you for the compliments in the other posting, you made me blush! (and as anyone who knows me can tell you - that is no mean feat). Interesting list of names - going back to lulu's comments on the Unscramble eval - if that was what was being done then there should have been no OT Preps for the latest quarter of stats - but, instead, there were 59 of them. your comments about the promotion of how quickly one can get through the OT levels is pretty interesting - every time something like this is done it results in a total fiasco. It is also going to fuck up the income because people will not use up their APR's, so I guess that will result in large amounts of "booksales" as the regges etc get them to debit their accounts. That will please DM and Norman - ASI will get bags of moolah out of that. Still they will be able to reg all these people again to "clean up the cases.." that's always a money maker... I was surprised to see Anne Archer and Jenna Elfman on the OT V comps - I would have figured they would have completed that long ago. Hmm it sounds like there has been some pressure applied to CC Int.. If you - or anyone else - gets a chance maybe searching through the comps lists for CC Int will show how many of these names come from there. as ever cerri - thank you for taking the time to make this an interesting newsgroup! deo From: Tilman Hausherr (tilman@berlin.snafu.de ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-12-27 10:09:28 PST On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:04:43 -0400, "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in [77437396b107c106e5b1316cca653f62@anonymous.poster]: >AOLA COMPLETIONS ISSUE 159 [circa July 2002] From which magazine is this? Is it from ADVANCE or does AOLA have its magazine with the same name? -- Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP5.55] Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment tilman@berlin.snafu.de http://www.xenu.de Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails. Find broken links on your web site: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/xenulink.html The Xenu bookstore: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/bookstore.html From: Cerridwen (Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-12-27 14:10:10 PST "Tilman Hausherr" [tilman@berlin.snafu.de] wrote in message hp5p0vssf8lqie3jhf2d3c48dccaom5gts@4ax.com ... > On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:04:43 -0400, "Cerridwen" > [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in > [77437396b107c106e5b1316cca653f62@anonymous.poster]: > > >AOLA COMPLETIONS ISSUE 159 [circa July 2002] > > From which magazine is this? Is it from ADVANCE or does AOLA have its > magazine with the same name? Sorry about that. Yes, Advance Magazine is the mag for AOLA. Advance is also the name of the magazine for AOUK. I try to post which org (AOLA or AOUK) when I post the data and I'll be sure to include the Magazine name. -- Cerridwen "Informing people doesn't involve trying to silence those who disagree with you." --Prignillius http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats.htm From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-12-28 08:39:53 PST Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Cerridwen) wrote in message [OTIGAROB37617.673599537@anonymous.poster] ... > "Tilman Hausherr" [tilman@berlin.snafu.de] wrote in message > news:hp5p0vssf8lqie3jhf2d3c48dccaom5gts@4ax.com ... > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:04:43 -0400, "Cerridwen" > > [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in > > [77437396b107c106e5b1316cca653f62@anonymous.poster]: > > > > >AOLA COMPLETIONS ISSUE 159 [circa July 2002] > > > > From which magazine is this? Is it from ADVANCE or does AOLA have its > > magazine with the same name? > > > Sorry about that. Yes, Advance Magazine is the mag for AOLA. > > Advance is also the name of the magazine for AOUK. I try to post > which org (AOLA or AOUK) when I post the data and I'll be sure to > include the Magazine name. It's more than the same name. It's the same magazine. Advance is written and designed at management level. There are modifications made for each of the AOs (AOLA, AOSH EU, AOSH UK, AOSH ANZO). This includes completions lists, personalized articles or stories for that AO, etc. However, the basic magazines (religious history article, cover art, ads, success stories, etc) is identical for all of the AOs. From: Cerridwen (Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-12-28 09:28:04 PST "Lulu Belle" [exesso96@yahoo.com] wrote in message news:7db3d0ad.0212280839.45db99c5@posting.google.com ... > > > > Advance is also the name of the magazine for AOUK. I try to post > > which org (AOLA or AOUK) when I post the data and I'll be sure to > > include the Magazine name. > > > > It's more than the same name. It's the same magazine. > > Advance is written and designed at management level. There are > modifications made for each of the AOs (AOLA, AOSH EU, AOSH UK, AOSH > ANZO). This includes completions lists, personalized articles or > stories for that AO, etc. However, the basic magazines (religious > history article, cover art, ads, success stories, etc) is identical > for all of the AOs. Yes. You are correct about this. The funny thing is that as I sit here and look over Advance Issue 160 from both AOLA and AO UK, I noticed that the AOLA Issue has 30 Pages but the AOUK Issue only has 22 pages. However the person who did the *CONTENTS* page wasn't paying attention and they use the same *CONTENTS* For both issues. On the AO UK Contents page they list Departments-- 24 OT Phenomena 28 Completions 30 Information This is the same data for the AOLA Contents page but in the AOUK Mag there are no pages 24 to 30. The C of S does the exact same thing for the Class V org Mags. All the Magazine are exactly alike. The only difference is the Name of the Mag, and the Completions lists. The org news is usually the same as well but not always. Some times they actually post local news rather than the generic stuff. -- Cerridwen "Informing people doesn't involve trying to silence those who disagree with you." --Prignillius http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats.htm From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-12-28 16:06:00 PST Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Cerridwen) wrote in message [XGJJ0OIU37618.4776851852@anonymous.poster] ... > "Lulu Belle" [exesso96@yahoo.com] wrote in message > news:7db3d0ad.0212280839.45db99c5@posting.google.com ... > > > > > > > > Advance is also the name of the magazine for AOUK. I try to post > > > which org (AOLA or AOUK) when I post the data and I'll be sure to > > > include the Magazine name. > > > > > > > > It's more than the same name. It's the same magazine. > > > > Advance is written and designed at management level. There are > > modifications made for each of the AOs (AOLA, AOSH EU, AOSH UK, AOSH > > ANZO). This includes completions lists, personalized articles or > > stories for that AO, etc. However, the basic magazines (religious > > history article, cover art, ads, success stories, etc) is identical > > for all of the AOs. > > Yes. You are correct about this. > > The funny thing is that as I sit here and look over Advance Issue 160 > from both AOLA and AO UK, I noticed that the AOLA Issue has 30 Pages > but the AOUK Issue only has 22 pages. > > However the person who did the *CONTENTS* page wasn't paying attention > and they use the same *CONTENTS* For both issues. > > On the AO UK Contents page they list > > Departments-- > > 24 OT Phenomena > 28 Completions > 30 Information > > This is the same data for the AOLA Contents page but in the AOUK Mag > there are no pages 24 to 30. Cerri, I'm sure - I'm POSITIVE - this was a mistake. It sounds like part of the magazine either didn't get printed or was printed but didn't get bound into the book with the rest. Believe me, there is NO WAY management would have allowed UK to leave out part of the mag. My guess is it was a production screw up of some kind. And, believe me, when it comes to a major screw up of a mag, I would also guess that someone is doing some Building Improvements in basic black as a result. From: roger gonnet (gonnet@antisectes.net ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-12-28 08:28:07 PST "Tilman Hausherr" [tilman@berlin.snafu.de] a ˇcrit dans le message de nhp5p0vssf8lqie3jhf2d3c48dccaom5gts@4ax.com... > On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:04:43 -0400, "Cerridwen" > [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in > [77437396b107c106e5b1316cca653f62@anonymous.poster]: > > >AOLA COMPLETIONS ISSUE 159 [circa July 2002] > > From which magazine is this? Is it from ADVANCE or does AOLA have its > magazine with the same name? different Advance mags are issued in every Saint Hills; so, on has : SH UK, SH EU, SH LA, SH ANZO - I suppose that Flag is not considered a SH. roger From: Cerridwen (anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-22 07:27:25 PST NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. "Deomorto" [deomorto@my-deja.com] wrote in message cde9ed89.0208212343.b31b962@posting.google.com ... > "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message [b556547b650bcd0529a238ae0fcd9589@anonymous.poster] ... > > This data is gleaned from Advance Magazines > > > > Issue 156 circa Dec 2001 > > Issue 157 circa Jan 2002 > > Issue 158 circa April 2002 > > Issue 159 circa July 2002 > > > > Important note: These issues are always a few months behind. July > > 2002 issue is actually reporting on completions from 2 to 3 months > > earlier. > > Thanks Cerri - your usual great job - I actually have something I > wanted to comment on so bear with me.. Absolutely. I love getting other opinions on these things, especially from you ;-) > > > > > > AOLA stats 156 157 158 159 > > snippage... > > > > Grade V Power 0 0 2 1 > > > > Grade VA Power 1 0 3 1 > > > > The State of Clear 12 10 8 12 > > > > The Clearing Course 2 0 0 0 > > > > Sunshine RD auditing 13 10 8 12 > > Nothing much changed in the quarterly stats here - now it starts to > get a bit more intriguing. Right, Plus 12 Clears made is not a lot of hope for the future stats. > > > > > Solo Auditor Part 1 31 16 27 37 > > > > Solo Certainty Course 12 3 30 6 > > Ok they have been maintaining a certain amount of solo auditor course > delivery > > > > > OT Preparations 20 12 0 59 > > and this is very interesting - 0 OT Preps for a quarter? Yes, I went back to that Issue and re confirmed it. Very strange. What that > says is that they had no auditors for this at all - what I would > suspect from this is that a) They had some severe refund problems 3 > quarters ago - I do know they have had problems with a couple of type > 3s just prior to that b) during the period of no OT preps completions > the auditors and C/Ses were getting firmly beaten around the head and > retreaded - possibly a coupla RPFings? c) They have had a delivery > mission in the org for the last quarter once the auditors were gotten > back into delivery. Yes OR another possibility is that somehow they allowed most of the OT preps to be done at ASHO. I know that sounds weird but I noticed in recent Promo that they are showing pictures of the AOLA/ASHO tech delivery team. Of course I got a bazillion copies of that promo but now I can't find a single piece of it. Kind of weird to be combining orgs like that. I wonder if they are just so short of auditors that AOLA had to use ASHO for OT Preps. > > > > Solo Auditor Part II 38 37 21 60 > > > > OT Eligibility 33 21 34 60 > > > > R6EW 2 1 4 7 > > > > New OT 1 32 50 46 63 > > > > OT II 19 36 56 76 > > > > OT III 16 29 40 70 > > > > OT III Expanded 0 4 1 0 > > > > New OT IV 9 15 26 73 > > > > New OT V 15 18 17 50 > > > Hmm these are very strange stats - what it looks like is that they had > 45 people or so start Solo Auditor part II and stay through OT V - > almost as if they were one group. The reason I say that is that they > have very little completions on anything else - unless you have left > some stuff out. No these are complete lists from AOLA/Advance Magazine. As you know AOLA only delivers these services (OT Levels) and not much more. > > Without access to any info on what or where these came from I would > suspect that these were org or mission staff using up awards - it > looks very strange, I know from running an AO how hard it can be to > run people through the solo>OT 1- III, OT IV and V - it would be very > unusual indeed . In order to produce the amount of IV and V comps the > HGC in the AO would have been having to deliver around 635 WDAHs per > week - compared to their previous delivery of 220 per week. That > would take adding 10 full time NOTs auditors at once at the beginning > of the quarter. OK Here is some more data. The C of S is now absolutely bragging about how fast you can get through the OT Levels. They are on the verge of violating that Tech Degrades PL LOL! Here is a quote from Int Scn News Issue 21 from the 2002 (June) Maiden Voyage Anniversary Event ~start quote~ It was on last year's Maiden Voyage that Mr. Miscavige announced what he called the most important program since the Golden Age of Tech: "arbitraries removed" [Note: Arbitraries removed is a DM invention issued as an RTC policy. " Its entire purpose was to radically speed progress up The Bridge." he said, "And the program to accomplish that was summed up in just four words: DO THE GRADE CHART!!" " But let there be no mistake, the objective wasn't just 'faster progress.' No, it was to get people up to and through OT" And the statistics Mr. Miscavige presented demonstrated the stunning results of this program. Note: Just like LRH, DM is always promoting what a god damn genius he is and I will tell you something else you probably already know. Having CI (counter intention) to ANYTHING DM wants done could possibly get you declared an SP. Minimumly you will be sec checked. I've seen it] Clears preparing to move onto the OT levels used to require an average of 145 hours of OT Preps and Eligibility for OT auditing. Now Clears are taking an average of just 35 hours, from the point they get to the AO through to starting New OT 1. Where there used to be 35 requests a month for Eligibility approval from RTC to go onto the OT levels, this figure has now increased to 450 per month! "Then there is the average time to move from Clear to New OT V. It used to be fifteen months; today the average time is FIVE months. So it's now three times faster to move up these levels. ~end quote~ The above is just one example of what is going on with promoting the "speed" in which you can get through your OT levels. Entire brochures are coming in the mail promoting how fast it is to get From Clear to OT V. > > not sure if you will ever get the chance to check on it cerri but if > you do ever get around there it would be interesting to find out what > happened. > > As I said - I suspect something strange and out of the ordinary - it > doesn;t look like they were building up to it and it just doesn;t > happen that way. I know. Strange and out of the ordinary is always a possibility with these guys ;-) > > > > > Totals 260 268 335 597 > > > > The stats at AOLA are definitely up. > > > > Now before anyone starts howling that they are all false, I have to > > tell you that this data is obtained by a hand count of completions. > > I don;t think they are false at all - but I doubt sincerely that it is > an indicator of great public delivery. But I could be wrong . > > As I said above - the figures look like a block of completions of some > kind. > > ...some snippage > > This trend may last for another few months and the next > > Advance Mag stats may show a continued increase but I kind of doubt it. > > It doesn;t look like a trend Cerri - it looks like a demographic > "bulge" for want of a better word. Yes, I think the bulge may be the OT Ambassadors doing a very serious PUSH to get those people who are already Clear and Fully Paid at AOLA, all rounded up and put on course. I could be wrong on this as well. I am just taking bits of data from here and there and trying to piece the puzzle together. The OT Ambassadors were given "orders" to get people on to the OT levels. They were not ordered to get New People IN. Butinstead, to get people onto the OT levels. I think DM needed a good showing of stats. Stats in Class V orgs suck. He needed OT's being made and fast. There were a bunch of Clears (and there are many more) just sitting in the LA field and a concerted effort was made to round them up and get them on service. I don't think they can keep up this stat push. Eventually they will run out of Clears that want to do any more services and by the stats, they certainty are not making more Clears in any kind of quantity for a future "flow" The "bulge" is interesting. I don't honestly think it is the beginning of an "OT ERA" LOL!! But, the C of S and DM are soaking it for all it's worth to prove that DM is some kind of fucking genius and knows how to get the stats up. No matter how stupid and blinded or indoc'd Scientologists can be, they call can read a graph. They can see the orgs are dying. If you look at what is being promoted it is the number OT's being made due to DM's brilliance and that Orgs are now started to go St. Hill size. Of course, these orgs are in places like Hungary, or Venezuela where no Internet exists. Additionally these orgs do not have the same fee scale that the American orgs have. Two of the orgs that went St. Hill size this past year were both in Mexico City. My understanding is that a 12.5 intensive at the Mexico org is around $1000.00 That is very cheap based on US standards. Mexico had many Spanish speaking NON Mexican's doing services based on that price. And of course it's even cheaper if you buy intensives in large packages. I have no idea what the prices are in Hungary or St. Petersburg, Russia, but I seriously doubt they are on par with US prices. I have no idea how these people are going to afford FLAG prices. > > > > > I'll keep you posted. > > Please do!! Of course, you are one of my very favorite critics and as always, it's been a pleasure. Cerri From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-22 18:41:44 PST "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message [snip] > > > OT Preparations 20 12 0 59 > > > > and this is very interesting - 0 OT Preps for a quarter? > > > Yes, I went back to that Issue and re confirmed it. Very > strange. > > > What that > > says is that they had no auditors for this at all - what I would > > suspect from this is that a) They had some severe refund problems 3 > > quarters ago - I do know they have had problems with a couple of type > > 3s just prior to that b) during the period of no OT preps completions > > the auditors and C/Ses were getting firmly beaten around the head and > > retreaded - possibly a coupla RPFings? c) They have had a delivery > > mission in the org for the last quarter once the auditors were gotten > > back into delivery. > > Yes OR another possibility is that somehow they allowed most of the OT > preps to be done at ASHO. I know that sounds weird but I noticed in > recent Promo that they are showing pictures of the AOLA/ASHO tech > delivery team. Of course I got a bazillion copies of that promo but now > I can't find a single piece of it. > > Kind of weird to be combining orgs like that. I wonder if they are > just so short of auditors that AOLA had to use ASHO for OT Preps. No. It's the PAC Unscramble Eval. There's an LRH Policy called "Prices, Upper Orgs." Per this policy, any higher org can offer any service a lower org can offer, providing they charge more for it. I believe the minimum amount additional they have to charge over the lower org's rates is 10%. PAC was originally designed, or conceptualized, to be a place where a public person would move from one org to the other as he progressed up the Bridge. He'd start at LA Day, move into ASHO, then into AOLA. In the old days, before Dianetic Clear, the org progression thing pretty much existed. The person would do his academy levels and lower grades at a Class IV org (LA Org). The person had to finish the Briefing Course (ASHO) before he could do Power (at AOLA), then the Clearing Course (at AOLA), then Solo and his OT Levels. Dianetic Clear pretty much changed all that. A person could go clear without having any training at all. Without going through all of the details of the history, Solo became something that was offered at all three orgs. The DCSI (later becoming the CCRD) was offered at all three orgs. OT Preps and Elig were available at both ASHO and AO. You didn't have to do the BC to do the Clearing Course, so you didn't have to go to ASHO at all if you had the bucks to do your Preps at AO. You could do your whole bridge at AO, from the Purif through OT V, if you wanted to. The original "vision" of the PAC Bridge became three entities (five, if you consider the Day and Foundation orgs of LA Org and ASHO as separate orgs) which operated totally independently and competed with each other for the same public for the same services. My time track and history on this may not be too accurate, but I believe the basic information is correct. There was an LRH eval that came out (late seventies? I'm not sure when) where the purpose was to "unscramble" the PAC bridge by forcing orgs to "concentrate on their specialized services." One of the biggest issues that existed was the competition of AOLA and ASHO regarding OT Preps delivery. ASHO is supposed to be, in theory, the "official" OT Preps org. In reality, though, it has generally been a service that most people do at AOLA. Several reasons: AOLA has more money and has generally had more and better auditors, both SO and non-SO. Preps is often part of an "OT Package" at AO. This means that if you buy your OT Levels, you could get your preps at a discount. (Theoretically, you could still do them at ASHO, but most people didn't.) Third, there was an idea that was promoted, overtly or covertly by the AO, that if you did your preps there they would be shorter than they would be at ASHO, because AO had more of a vested interest in moving you onto your OT Levels than ASHO did. (It would be more in ASHO's interest to keep you forever, since by completing you, they'd lose you.) The subject of preps delivery was a very hot subject in PAC. Regardless of the theory that an org "booms through training," factually, the vast majority of org income comes from HGC delivery. OT Preps is/was probably the biggest moneymaker in both AO and ASHO. Not to mention the other org stats that it has a huge effect on like: Value of Services Delivered, Well Done Auditing Hours, Paid Completions. It's factually, one of the biggest, if not the biggest, stat maker in an SO Org. There have been forcible handlings that have occurred over the years to eliminate the competition between AO and ASHO on this subject. The "PAC Unscramble" thing had a lot of attention of Int managment in recent years. Whatever the AO/ASHO Prep thing that Cerri mentioned was that she got in the promo piece, and the weird preps stats from AO are, I'm sure it's a result of one of these PAC "handlings" to "unscramble the PAC Bridge." From: Cerridwen (anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-22 15:43:22 PST NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. "Lulu Belle" [exesso96@yahoo.com] wrote in message 7db3d0ad.0208220225.cc98d4a@posting.google.com ... > "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message [b556547b650bcd0529a238ae0fcd9589@anonymous.poster] ... > > > [snip] > > > > What I think you may be seeing here is a "backlog" at > > the AOLA that finally got handled. This means that there > > were quite a few Clears and OT's sitting in the LA field that could > > easily have been gotten back onto service. > > > Another thing that you may be seeing, which I've noticed from > completions lists that have been published lately on ARS from Flag and > the Advanced Orgs, is that people who were at a higher level are being > retreaded through the lower levels. > > Guys who were supposedly OT III in the 80s or 90s are being audited on > NED, attesting to Clear, etc. Yes I have seen the exact same thing. > > It sounds like part of the whole thing on "false F/Ns" also includes > "false attests." People, rightly or wrongly, are being made to do > their lower grade chart over again. Yup. > > > > On some other part of this thread, someone said that they believe that > the public and staff are probably not permitted to walk around > outside. This sounds right to me. It may be a result of demonstrations > and pickets that have been done in the past. Yes I was thinking the exact same thing myself. They may not want people outdoors being exposed to picketeers for a couple of reason. One reason is that they want to be shown as being terrorized in general by picketeers, in keeping with the Keith Henson terrorist picketer theme. The other is that they don't want their guys seeing Tory or other Ex's and actually talking to them because they truly are in terror that someone may hear the truth. -- Cerridwen Lurking Scientologists start here: http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats.htm From: Cerridwen (anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org ) Subject: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-23 09:06:32 PST NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. "Lulu Belle" [exesso96@yahoo.com] wrote in message 7db3d0ad.0208221741.1707c431@posting.google.com ... > "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message > > No. > > It's the PAC Unscramble Eval. > > There's an LRH Policy called "Prices, Upper Orgs." Per this policy, > any higher org can offer any service a lower org can offer, providing > they charge more for it. I believe the minimum amount additional they > have to charge over the lower org's rates is 10%. > > PAC was originally designed, or conceptualized, to be a place where a > public person would move from one org to the other as he progressed up > the Bridge. He'd start at LA Day, move into ASHO, then into AOLA. > > In the old days, before Dianetic Clear, the org progression thing > pretty much existed. The person would do his academy levels and lower > grades at a Class IV org (LA Org). The person had to finish the > Briefing Course (ASHO) before he could do Power (at AOLA), then the > Clearing Course (at AOLA), then Solo and his OT Levels. > > Dianetic Clear pretty much changed all that. A person could go clear > without having any training at all. Without going through all of the > details of the history, Solo became something that was offered at all > three orgs. The DCSI (later becoming the CCRD) was offered at all > three orgs. OT Preps and Elig were available at both ASHO and AO. You > didn't have to do the BC to do the Clearing Course, so you didn't have > to go to ASHO at all if you had the bucks to do your Preps at AO. You > could do your whole bridge at AO, from the Purif through OT V, if you > wanted to. > > The original "vision" of the PAC Bridge became three entities (five, > if you consider the Day and Foundation orgs of LA Org and ASHO as > separate orgs) which operated totally independently and competed with > each other for the same public for the same services. > > My time track and history on this may not be too accurate, but I > believe the basic information is correct. > > There was an LRH eval that came out (late seventies? I'm not sure > when) where the purpose was to "unscramble" the PAC bridge by forcing > orgs to "concentrate on their specialized services." > > One of the biggest issues that existed was the competition of AOLA and > ASHO regarding OT Preps delivery. > > ASHO is supposed to be, in theory, the "official" OT Preps org. In > reality, though, it has generally been a service that most people do > at AOLA. > > Several reasons: AOLA has more money and has generally had more and > better auditors, both SO and non-SO. Preps is often part of an "OT > Package" at AO. This means that if you buy your OT Levels, you could > get your preps at a discount. (Theoretically, you could still do them > at ASHO, but most people didn't.) Third, there was an idea that was > promoted, overtly or covertly by the AO, that if you did your preps > there they would be shorter than they would be at ASHO, because AO had > more of a vested interest in moving you onto your OT Levels than ASHO > did. (It would be more in ASHO's interest to keep you forever, since > by completing you, they'd lose you.) > > The subject of preps delivery was a very hot subject in PAC. > Regardless of the theory that an org "booms through training," > factually, the vast majority of org income comes from HGC delivery. OT > Preps is/was probably the biggest moneymaker in both AO and ASHO. Not > to mention the other org stats that it has a huge effect on like: > Value of Services Delivered, Well Done Auditing Hours, Paid > Completions. It's factually, one of the biggest, if not the biggest, > stat maker in an SO Org. > > There have been forcible handlings that have occurred over the years > to eliminate the competition between AO and ASHO on this subject. The > "PAC Unscramble" thing had a lot of attention of Int managment in > recent years. > > Whatever the AO/ASHO Prep thing that Cerri mentioned was that she got > in the promo piece, and the weird preps stats from AO are, I'm sure > it's a result of one of these PAC "handlings" to "unscramble the PAC > Bridge." Wow! Fabulous data Lulu Belle. Thanks so much. I found a copy of that promo piece. It is actually an AOLA Promo piece (17' x 22') 4 color glossary. It's pretty much the same old pitch but it does say : "Come to the PAC Bridge this summer and go OT full time. With the combined delivery capacity of AOLA and ASHO, pre-OTs are moving up The Bridge through the OT levels at amazing speed. All arbitraries have been removed-- more OTs are being made at AOLA than ever in its history. "There is nothing like moving up The Bridge at the PAC Base in the largest community of Scientologists in teh world...." There are lots of pictures but one of them is a picture entitled "THE ASHO AND AOLA DELIVERY TEAM" The face count is 94 people in this photo. Additional photos show a very busy L.Ron Hubbard Way and AOLA reception, but if you've been in Scn for any amount of time you know the photos are never spontaneous, but instead they are always set up to look very busy and very perfect. You never see fat or ugly or poorly dressed people in Scn pictures. Now there is a Q and A section or "Common Questions" Sections "Q. What about my OT Preparations auditing? OT Preps can only be done at a Saint Hill org or above (ref: the grade chart). Note: that with all arbitraries removed from your route to OT, this action handled exactly and precisely the actions you need to make it onto the OT levels. Many pre-OTs get through this action in 1-2 intensives. Again, this can be done concurrent with Solo I, or when arriving to AOLA (before starting Solo II). With our recently expanded service lines, our service in this HGC is instant." Then there is this 2 x 2 inch box that says "OT FACT - AOLA is producing the highest number of OTS in its history with an OT made every 2 hours!" Lots more of the usual promo stuff and a inset with a photo of Stephanie Cary, Captain AOLA. -- Cerridwen Lurking Scientologists start here: http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats.htm From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-24 10:01:36 PST [snip] > > Whatever the AO/ASHO Prep thing that Cerri mentioned was that she got > > in the promo piece, and the weird preps stats from AO are, I'm sure > > it's a result of one of these PAC "handlings" to "unscramble the PAC > > Bridge." > > Wow! Fabulous data Lulu Belle. Thanks so much. > > I found a copy of that promo piece. It is actually an AOLA Promo > piece (17' x 22') 4 color glossary. It's pretty much the same old > pitch but it does say : > > "Come to the PAC Bridge this summer and go OT full time. That's a dead giveaway that what I said about PAC Unscramble is the correct explanation. "The PAC Bridge" is the Unscramble buzzword. You would never find a PAC org use that term on their own, without management intervention. Orgs are interested in their own stats only. Staff get paid by their own org GI, not by the GI of the org next door. It's their own stats that they get judged by by management. As a matter of fact, if another org does well, they are upbraided for being poor by comparison. They compete with each other in the Birthday Game. I can tell you that the PAC staff HATED the "one big happy family - PAC Bridge" thing that was foisted on them. In reality, there isn't really a lot of interaction between the orgs normally. They are a whole lot happier and more comfortable when they are in competition with each other. This is from part of this thread from Deomorto (hasn't made it to this newsreader): > Interesting list of names - going back to lulu's comments on the > Unscramble eval - if that was what was being done then there should > have been no OT Preps for the latest quarter of stats - but, instead, > there were 59 of them. This is my guess as to what happened: 1. There was an order that came down that AOLA could no longer deliver Preps - they all had to be done at ASHO. May have even ripped off AOLA's HGC auditors and sent them to ASHO in the process. Probably accompanied by a mission. 2. The no-more-Preps thing crashed AOLA's stats. 3. Someone from management decided that, to counter the stat crash, AOLA could count all the Preps comps that had been done. Some workout so that preps could be an ASHO-only service without killing AO. 59 preps comps is a lot of comps. Somehow it has to be a "backlog" stat of some kind, meaning, they were now allowed to count them when the couldn't before, so they were counted all at once. Another similar scenario was that AOLA was told they couldn't count their Preps comps because it was supposed to be an ASHO service. It crashed their stats. Someone reversed the order, and they got to count them all at one time. My guess is that it's something along these lines. From: ladayla (ladayla_member@newsguy.com ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-25 11:51:07 PST In article [7db3d0ad.0208240901.2aeb5d5c@posting.google.com], exesso96@yahoo.com says... > >[snip] I have a guess that OT Preps are being delivered at ASHO because they can have Briefing Course students deliver them as student auditing ( for course completion) at no cost to the Org. I don't know about 'now', but historically there are many more students on course at ASHO than there are at AOLA. That provides a pool of unpaid auditors to deliver expensive services. la From: Beverly Rice (dbj1120@mpinet.net ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-25 13:20:35 PST ladayla wrote: > I have a guess that OT Preps are being delivered at ASHO because they can have > Briefing Course students deliver them as student auditing ( for course > completion) at no cost to the Org. > I don't know about 'now', but historically there are many more students on > course at ASHO than there are at AOLA. That provides a pool of unpaid auditors > to deliver expensive services. For newbies: ASHO - American St. Hill Organization AOLA - Advanced Org of Los Angeles They are both in LA. ldayla . . . why is it that ASHO students will deliver the auditing for free? I would like to know,please. The Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, SHSBC, for the complete package runs about $32,000.00. I believe that most people buy it in bits, since most people don't have the money to pay for it all at once. But now, besides taking their money (plus the price goes up if you end up having to take extra intensives) . . . you think they make them give out services without any compensation as well? [snip] From: Cerridwen (anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org ) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-25 11:15:26 PST NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. "Deomorto" [deomorto@my-deja.com] wrote in message cde9ed89.0208240808.1cd60e09@posting.google.com... > > Sheesh Cerri you need to be careful, the int data Bureau is going to > be looking to recruit you! Yes they'd love to get their hands on me in more ways than one. > Thank you for additional data! Sure. ;-) > > And - thank you for the compliments in the other posting, you made me > blush! (and as anyone who knows me can tell you - that is no mean > feat). :-)) Your welcome deo, I'm happy to hear of this! > > Interesting list of names - going back to lulu's comments on the > Unscramble eval - if that was what was being done then there should > have been no OT Preps for the latest quarter of stats - but, instead, > there were 59 of them. Yes, Lulu has added some additional comments that are quite good. I figure between the three of us we should be able analyze these stats and up coming stats quite well. > > your comments about the promotion of how quickly one can get through > the OT levels is pretty interesting - every time something like this > is done it results in a total fiasco. It is also going to fuck up the > income because people will not use up their APR's, so I guess that > will result in large amounts of "booksales" as the regges etc get them > to debit their accounts. That will please DM and Norman - ASI will get > bags of moolah out of that. Ya, a reg's dream, to book those fat APR accounts. > > Still they will be able to reg all these people again to "clean up the > cases.." that's always a money maker... But of course, and it amazes me that most (not all) of them buy it again. > > I was surprised to see Anne Archer and Jenna Elfman on the OT V comps > - I would have figured they would have completed that long ago. Hmm it > sounds like there has been some pressure applied to CC Int.. Yes, I think it's part of this overall "Year of the OT" where DM is trying to cover his ass and make it look like he knows what the hell he is doing. The stats are definitely way up this year from last year but they have been on a dismal decline overall. It will now be interesting to watch if the stats stay at this level (generally up) or if they slowly but surely start to decline. I think DM is at a pivotal point. He has got to keep the stats up and the OT's rolling off this line and he's got to start consistently making St. Hill Size Orgs. There were just too many Scio's scratching their heads wondering what was going on. He's bought himself some breathing room with these stats and with 6 St. Hill size orgs in the past 6 months, but who knows if the trend will last. Hopefully, the stats from Flag and AO will give us an indicator of what is going on. I am really interested in collecting consistant data on the Class V orgs. The local orgs all produce a Major Mag every few months with completions. People could just tally them up in under 5 minutes as these completion lists usually have only 10 to 50 total completions. We could then start getting an idea if the Class V orgs were dying on the vine or starting to improve. Btw, I think I'll put a pitch in here to anyone who is interested in following the stats and wants to help out. If you get local org mags you could either post the stats here on ars or you could email or snail mail Kristi with the data. Personally, I am very interested in keeping an eye on Scn's expansion or lack thereof. I see Scn promoting that they are in the midst of "unprecedented expansion" which of course has been going on for the past 20 years, and we all know how they lie about this stuff for the past 20 years as well. On the other hand I see certain critics claiming or thinking that the entire Scn empire is about to crash in on itself and disappear, which is the dream of someone that is quite clueless about the reality of Scn. I think an honest and accurate accounting of their stats is important for many reasons, but mainly so that the Indoc'd Ones will have what they consider to be RAW DATA. One thing about Scios is that they know what the stats mean. If Flag turns out to have a 10 year danger trend then most Scientologists will stop and look at that. It's one of those built in things with Scientologists, expecially anyone that has been in on staff or in an exec position. No matter how much Indocing your've got going on, Stats seem to cut right through the Indoc. And no matter how much Scientologists try to justify things they can not justify down stats. Downstats get a "it does not compute" response from them and send the indoc into a tither. > > If you - or anyone else - gets a chance maybe searching through the > comps lists for CC Int will show how many of these names come from > there. > Good Idea, I'll put it on my list ;-) > as ever cerri - thank you for taking the time to make this an > interesting newsgroup! well thank you deo for your contributions as well. It really helps to be able to talk to a sane person who understands what these stats really mean. cerri From: ptsc (ptsc_AT_nym_DOT_cryptofortress_DOT_com) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-25 14:25:42 PST On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:09:11 -0400, "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote: >Yes, I think it's part of this overall "Year of the OT" where DM >is trying to cover his ass and make it look like he knows what >the hell he is doing. The stats are definitely way up this year from >last year but they have been on a dismal decline overall. It will now >be interesting to watch if the stats stay at this level (generally up) >or if they slowly but surely start to decline. I think DM is at a >pivotal point. He has got to keep the stats up and the OT's rolling >off this line and he's got to start consistently making >St. Hill Size Orgs. There were just too many Scio's scratching their >heads wondering what was going on. He's bought himself some breathing >room with these stats and with 6 St. Hill size orgs in the past 6 >months, but who knows if the trend will last. What about the fact that these "new St. Hill size orgs" are flat-out bogus? They are frankly false reports. Ted reports the Vegas org going "St. Hill size" and rather tellingly, they didn't even hang up the "St. Hill Size" banner in the front, but in the back, as if they knew that it was a false report and were ashamed of it. Maybe I'm reading too much into that, but I am baffled as to how they can claim the orgs in question are "St. Hill Size," with one of the more flagrantly bogus claims being the Vegas org Ted reported on. ptsc From: Ted Mayett (ted-mayett@skylink.net) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-26 09:46:44 PST On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 17:21:11 -0400, ptsc [ptsc AT nym DOT cryptofortress DOT com] wrote: >On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:09:11 -0400, "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] >wrote: > >>Yes, I think it's part of this overall "Year of the OT" where DM >>is trying to cover his ass and make it look like he knows what >>the hell he is doing. The stats are definitely way up this year from >>last year but they have been on a dismal decline overall. It will now >>be interesting to watch if the stats stay at this level (generally up) >>or if they slowly but surely start to decline. I think DM is at a >>pivotal point. He has got to keep the stats up and the OT's rolling >>off this line and he's got to start consistently making >>St. Hill Size Orgs. There were just too many Scio's scratching their >>heads wondering what was going on. He's bought himself some breathing >>room with these stats and with 6 St. Hill size orgs in the past 6 >>months, but who knows if the trend will last. > >What about the fact that these "new St. Hill size orgs" are flat-out >bogus? They are frankly false reports. Ted reports the Vegas >org going "St. Hill size" and rather tellingly, they didn't even hang >up the "St. Hill Size" banner in the front, but in the back, as if they >knew that it was a false report and were ashamed of it. Maybe >I'm reading too much into that, but I am baffled as to how they can >claim the orgs in question are "St. Hill Size," with one of the more >flagrantly bogus claims being the Vegas org Ted reported on. > >ptsc No, the banner said, "We Are Going St. Hill Size" It did not say 'we are st. hill size'. My theory was that they hung the banner in the back of the building because they were told to hang it somewhere by the upline masters. They know the banner is a lie, they are not going st. hill size, they are nothing resembling st. hill size. So they hung the lousy banner where the fewest of people could see the thing. This is nothing new anyway as I think about it. While I was a monkey in good standing, banners would come in that were required to be hung up and displayed. Most times they were cheaply made affairs, and sometimes the staff would hang them out of view of the public. Fast-food banners for 99 cent hamburgers are better made and have more colors used than some or most of these scientology banners. From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-26 18:21:25 PST Ted Mayett [ted-mayett@skylink.net] wrote in message [78mkmuoh8hpsn72umo533r1e0bepgel572@4ax.com]... > On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 17:21:11 -0400, ptsc [ptsc AT nym DOT > cryptofortress DOT com] wrote: > > >On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:09:11 -0400, "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] > >wrote: > > > >>Yes, I think it's part of this overall "Year of the OT" where DM > >>is trying to cover his ass and make it look like he knows what > >>the hell he is doing. The stats are definitely way up this year from > >>last year but they have been on a dismal decline overall. It will now > >>be interesting to watch if the stats stay at this level (generally up) > >>or if they slowly but surely start to decline. I think DM is at a > >>pivotal point. He has got to keep the stats up and the OT's rolling > >>off this line and he's got to start consistently making > >>St. Hill Size Orgs. There were just too many Scio's scratching their > >>heads wondering what was going on. He's bought himself some breathing > >>room with these stats and with 6 St. Hill size orgs in the past 6 > >>months, but who knows if the trend will last. > > > >What about the fact that these "new St. Hill size orgs" are flat-out > >bogus? They are frankly false reports. Ted reports the Vegas > >org going "St. Hill size" and rather tellingly, they didn't even hang > >up the "St. Hill Size" banner in the front, but in the back, as if they > >knew that it was a false report and were ashamed of it. Maybe > >I'm reading too much into that, but I am baffled as to how they can > >claim the orgs in question are "St. Hill Size," with one of the more > >flagrantly bogus claims being the Vegas org Ted reported on. > > > >ptsc > > No, the banner said, "We Are Going St. Hill Size" > It did not say 'we are st. hill size'. > > My theory was that they hung the banner in the back of the building > because they were told to hang it somewhere by the upline masters. True. It is probably a "target" on their "St. Hill Size Program" run by the Flag Representative. For the uninitiated: Management gives orgs programs that are supposed to be run by staff. Different programs are sent to different staff. Programs are a series of actions or orders or steps that the staff are supposed to do or get done. Then some kind of "proof" that the action is done is sent uplines to show the compliance to the program. It is typical of a "Saint Hill Size Program" that the first action is a banner saying the org is "going Saint Hill Size." The banner is made, it gets hung, and a photo is taken of it which goes uplines. This becomes a "completed target" on a program. This is one of the major statistics of the Flag Rep. As bizzare as it sounds for an org that probably has ten public. The target on the program is still considered to be done. This is how it works. From: Ted Mayett (ted-mayett@skylink.net) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-26 18:43:10 PST On 26 Aug 2002 18:21:25 -0700, exesso96@yahoo.com (Lulu Belle) wrote: >It is typical of a "Saint Hill Size Program" that the first action is >a banner saying the org is "going Saint Hill Size." The banner is >made, it gets hung, and a photo is taken of it which goes uplines. > >This becomes a "completed target" on a program. This is one of the >major statistics of the Flag Rep. > >As bizzare as it sounds for an org that probably has ten public. The >target on the program is still considered to be done. This is how it >works. Without a doubt this is correct. But just for the record, this particular org in Las Vegas, Nevada has been going St. Hill Size since 1995. It might even have been earlier than that. But it was in 1995, shortly before I left, that I heard some talk of 'st hill size'. And a little tid-bit for the sad-news-department: A few Sunday's ago, and it must have been during "church-service" time, they had a vehicle count of 17. Sad news :( But we don't know if this was the combined might of both orgs, the Mission, and all the public they have showing up all at once. From: Thomas J Best (thomasjbest@hotmail.com) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-27 03:07:23 PST exesso96@yahoo.com (Lulu Belle) wrote in message [7db3d0ad.0208261721.53b156dd@posting.google.com]... > Ted Mayett [ted-mayett@skylink.net] wrote in message [78mkmuoh8hpsn72umo533r1e0bepgel572@4ax.com]... > > On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 17:21:11 -0400, ptsc [ptsc AT nym DOT > > cryptofortress DOT com] wrote: > > > > >On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:09:11 -0400, "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] > > >wrote: > > > > > >>Yes, I think it's part of this overall "Year of the OT" where DM > > >>is trying to cover his ass and make it look like he knows what > > >>the hell he is doing. The stats are definitely way up this year from > > >>last year but they have been on a dismal decline overall. It will now > > >>be interesting to watch if the stats stay at this level (generally up) > > >>or if they slowly but surely start to decline. I think DM is at a > > >>pivotal point. He has got to keep the stats up and the OT's rolling > > >>off this line and he's got to start consistently making > > >>St. Hill Size Orgs. There were just too many Scio's scratching their > > >>heads wondering what was going on. He's bought himself some breathing > > >>room with these stats and with 6 St. Hill size orgs in the past 6 > > >>months, but who knows if the trend will last. > > > > > >What about the fact that these "new St. Hill size orgs" are flat-out > > >bogus? They are frankly false reports. Ted reports the Vegas > > >org going "St. Hill size" and rather tellingly, they didn't even hang > > >up the "St. Hill Size" banner in the front, but in the back, as if they > > >knew that it was a false report and were ashamed of it. Maybe > > >I'm reading too much into that, but I am baffled as to how they can > > >claim the orgs in question are "St. Hill Size," with one of the more > > >flagrantly bogus claims being the Vegas org Ted reported on. > > > > > >ptsc > > > > No, the banner said, "We Are Going St. Hill Size" > > It did not say 'we are st. hill size'. > > > > My theory was that they hung the banner in the back of the building > > because they were told to hang it somewhere by the upline masters. > > > > True. It is probably a "target" on their "St. Hill Size Program" run > by the Flag Representative. > > For the uninitiated: Management gives orgs programs that are supposed > to be run by staff. Different programs are sent to different staff. > Programs are a series of actions or orders or steps that the staff are > supposed to do or get done. Then some kind of "proof" that the action > is done is sent uplines to show the compliance to the program. > > It is typical of a "Saint Hill Size Program" that the first action is > a banner saying the org is "going Saint Hill Size." The banner is > made, it gets hung, and a photo is taken of it which goes uplines. > > This becomes a "completed target" on a program. This is one of the > major statistics of the Flag Rep. > > As bizzare as it sounds for an org that probably has ten public. The > target on the program is still considered to be done. This is how it > works. This was *exactly* what killed the mighty and powerful USSR. Everything 'planned' by the all-powerful 'centre', backed by the inscrutable, unaccountable and fearsome coercion of the Bolshevik Politburo. Didn't matter that the 'target' stat was fudged and massaged all the way up the line, just so as the 'plan' was 'fulfilled' on paper, and everybody's ass was covered. tam "Of the few innocent pleasures left.... the jamming of commonsense down the throats of fools is perhaps the keenest." Thomas Huxley From: Cerridwen (anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-27 15:07:37 PST NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. Apolgogies for the lateness of this reply. I have tried posting it several times but the remailers are not cooperating. "ptsc" [ptsc AT nym DOT cryptofortress DOT com] wrote in message news:ndiimu8sp191r67jh9gnfel2gacjlfbohj@4ax.com... > > What about the fact that these "new St. Hill size orgs" are flat-out > bogus? They are frankly false reports. Ted reports the Vegas > org going "St. Hill size" and rather tellingly, they didn't even hang > up the "St. Hill Size" banner in the front, but in the back, as if they > knew that it was a false report and were ashamed of it. Maybe > I'm reading too much into that, but I am baffled as to how they can > claim the orgs in question are "St. Hill Size," with one of the more > flagrantly bogus claims being the Vegas org Ted reported on. > > ptsc The six org that have GONE St. Hill size in the past 6 months are: Two orgs in Mexico city St. Petersburg Russia Padova, Italy Budapest, Hungary Venezuela. All are off the beaten path and ARS may not have any members able to run by the org and do a check on them. So Yes these could be false reports but I don't think so. I think all 6 orgs met the minimum requirements of being officially declared ST. Hill size which is several hundred staff on post and several hundred people enrolled in the academy and a certain amount of WDAH a week and the Cash/Bills uncrossed. The recent Scn Events show video taped footage of these St. Hill size orgs which of course, could be all bogus but even with my very low opinion of Int Mgmt, I am farily certain they are not producing bogus video footage of these orgs and the number of staff and students that exist. They might be able to fake one St. Hill size org but NOT six. Now the Vegas orgs are about as far away from St. Hill size as you're gonna see. Vegas has a banner saying they are "going" St. Hill size, because that is what they are trying to do they are trying to GO St. Hill size. They are not even close and it is not being claimed that they are. It is only being claimed that they are trying. The six orgs above have GONE St. Hill size, meaning they have met the requirements of being declared St. Hill size, and for the life of me I can not find an exact and accurate list of those damn requirements and I wish someone would find and post the damn things. So yes, we know they lie, but these six orgs probably have met the St. Hill requirements. The fact that they are in places like Venezuela and Budapest makes it all very suspicious but I see no evidence yet of a false report. DM has bought himself some breathing room for now. -- Cerridwen Lurking Scientologists start here: http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats.htm From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-28 03:18:15 PST "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message [416fad2db95c7bda29a306d122b45562@anonymous.poster]... > NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name > above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify > the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. > > Apolgogies for the lateness of this reply. I have tried posting it > several times but the remailers are not cooperating. > > > "ptsc" [ptsc AT nym DOT cryptofortress DOT com] wrote in message > news:ndiimu8sp191r67jh9gnfel2gacjlfbohj@4ax.com... > > > > What about the fact that these "new St. Hill size orgs" are flat-out > > bogus? They are frankly false reports. Ted reports the Vegas > > org going "St. Hill size" and rather tellingly, they didn't even hang > > up the "St. Hill Size" banner in the front, but in the back, as if they > > knew that it was a false report and were ashamed of it. Maybe > > I'm reading too much into that, but I am baffled as to how they can > > claim the orgs in question are "St. Hill Size," with one of the more > > flagrantly bogus claims being the Vegas org Ted reported on. > > > > ptsc > > The six org that have GONE St. Hill size in the past 6 months are: > > Two orgs in Mexico city > St. Petersburg Russia > Padova, Italy > Budapest, Hungary > Venezuela. > > All are off the beaten path and ARS may not have > any members able to run by the org and do a check on them. > > So Yes these could be false reports but I don't think so. > I think all 6 orgs met the minimum requirements of being > officially declared ST. Hill size which is several > hundred staff on post and several hundred people enrolled > in the academy and a certain amount of WDAH a week and the > Cash/Bills uncrossed. I think you may be right. As I have posted previously, the biggest barrier an org has in getting to be SHS is lack of staff. From what I've heard (and I don't have first hand experience with this) it's a lot easier to get people to join staff in some of these "third world" countries. A lot of these people are poor, and there are no jobs. Working long hours in an org for little money may not be much different than what is offered to them elsewhere. Kind of "levels the playing field." Also, these people haven't necessarily heard bad things about Scientology. Scientology has the hardest time recruiting staff in areas where they have been around a long time, especially where there are a lot of ex-staff around, like LA. I have also heard that a lot of "out quals" that tend to exist in the US, like psych histories and huge amounts of credit card debt, which would make people not able to be on staff, don't exist in a lot of these countries. From what I've heard also, most of these SHS orgs start off as missions. A lot of what a mission does is Div VI services and selling books, neither of which requires a lot of training. I remember seeing some video about some mission in some foreign country with what looked like over a hundred staff. Someone told me later that pretty much *all* that mission did was sell books. From: Deomorto (deomorto@my-deja.com) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-28 14:01:34 PST exesso96@yahoo.com (Lulu Belle) wrote in message [7db3d0ad.0208280218.63a56ef6@posting.google.com]... > "Cerridwen" [anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org] wrote in message [416fad2db95c7bda29a306d122b45562@anonymous.poster]... > > NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name > > above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify > > the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. > > > > The six org that have GONE St. Hill size in the past 6 months are: > > > > Two orgs in Mexico city > > St. Petersburg Russia > > Padova, Italy > > Budapest, Hungary > > Venezuela. > > > > All are off the beaten path and ARS may not have > > any members able to run by the org and do a check on them. > > > > So Yes these could be false reports but I don't think so. > > I think all 6 orgs met the minimum requirements of being > > officially declared ST. Hill size which is several > > hundred staff on post and several hundred people enrolled > > in the academy and a certain amount of WDAH a week and the > > Cash/Bills uncrossed. > > > > I think you may be right. > > As I have posted previously, the biggest barrier an org has in getting > to be SHS is lack of staff. > > From what I've heard (and I don't have first hand experience with > this) it's a lot easier to get people to join staff in some of these > "third world" countries. > > A lot of these people are poor, and there are no jobs. Working long > hours in an org for little money may not be much different than what > is offered to them elsewhere. Kind of "levels the playing field." > The only one of those in a half-way "real" economy is Padova. But what would be interesting would be to know what the Gross Income and CGI and VSD are of those 6 orgs. I believe that when OC was at its height it was running around $100,000 GI - if any organization in St Petersberg was making that sort of money per week - believe me the Russian Mob would have them by the nuts. From: Lulu Belle (exesso96@yahoo.com) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-29 03:14:04 PST [snip] > > As I have posted previously, the biggest barrier an org has in getting > > to be SHS is lack of staff. > > > > From what I've heard (and I don't have first hand experience with > > this) it's a lot easier to get people to join staff in some of these > > "third world" countries. > > > > A lot of these people are poor, and there are no jobs. Working long > > hours in an org for little money may not be much different than what > > is offered to them elsewhere. Kind of "levels the playing field." > > > > The only one of those in a half-way "real" economy is Padova. But what > would be interesting would be to know what the Gross Income and CGI > and VSD are of those 6 orgs. You are right. I'm sure adjustments are made with these countries as to the income the org would have to make based on that country's economy. > I believe that when OC was at its height > it was running around $100,000 GI - if any organization in St > Petersberg was making that sort of money per week - believe me the > Russian Mob would have them by the nuts. Orange County org was kind of an anomoly. John Woodruff, the ex-ED, was probably one of the best, if not the best, executives Scientology ever had. He had tech training (I believe he was a Grad V), which a lot of Scientology execs don't have. He was also an experienced business man. I don't recall what kind of business he was in, but I'm almost positive he ran some kind of successful business before Scientology. Orange County itself is yuppyville. Full of white collar professionals. John tapped into that market. People would be introduced to Scientology through WISE management counsultant companies, primarily Sterling. These people would then be routed to OC Org. The org itself looked more like a business than a church. I think it had once been some kind of a strip mall. It had that look, with the grey carpet and cubicle dividers. Woodruff was criticized for this by Scn managment, but, considering his public, this was probably a smart thing. He and his staff looked and acted much more like professional business people than your average Scientology staff. The org made enough money so that he could actually afford to have decent people working for him. A lot of his public were wealthy professionals, such as chiropractors, dentists and doctors. In its heyday the org had routinely higher GI than most Sea Org service orgs. There were weeks when OC's GI was equal to or greater than AOLA's, which is the highest grossing SO org besides FSO. A series of things happened which hurt the org. Time Magazines's article on Scientology really blasted Sterling Managment. This hurt Sterling, which in turn hurt OC. I know at some point they had a huge amount of refund requests (possibly related to the Sterling thing; I don't know). Dave Petit, John's long time Deputy ED (another excellent executive) was recruited into the SO and became the CO of CC Int. John was pulled out of OC to become the ED of LA Day. I have no idea how the org is doing now. If anyone knows, I'd love to hear about it. From: Cerridwen (anmetet@freedom.gmsociety.org) Subject: Re: AOLA stats July 2002 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Date: 2002-08-28 07:07:32 PST NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail. "Lulu Belle" [exesso96@yahoo.com] wrote in message news:7db3d0ad.0208280218.63a56ef6@posting.google.com... > > As I have posted previously, the biggest barrier an org has in getting > to be SHS is lack of staff. > > From what I've heard (and I don't have first hand experience with > this) it's a lot easier to get people to join staff in some of these > "third world" countries. > > A lot of these people are poor, and there are no jobs. Working long > hours in an org for little money may not be much different than what > is offered to them elsewhere. Kind of "levels the playing field." This makes alot of sense. The only org it may not apply to is Padova. I understand Italy has a fairly good standard of living and Scn is doing quite well there. > > Also, these people haven't necessarily heard bad things about > Scientology. Scientology has the hardest time recruiting staff in > areas where they have been around a long time, especially where there > are a lot of ex-staff around, like LA. Another good point. Add to that the fact that there may not be many or any sites critical of scn in Hungarian, Russian, Spanish or Italian. > > I have also heard that a lot of "out quals" that tend to exist in the > US, like psych histories and huge amounts of credit card debt, which > would make people not able to be on staff, don't exist in a lot of > these countries. I never thought of this one. This is an excellent point. And again due to Scn sort of being "new" to the area and there not being alot of bad PR, they probably don't run into alot of antagonism with family members. Additionally, I don't have any way to confirm this but these orgs may be Foundation orgs. Many US orgs, especially the older ones have two orgs in one. For those not in the know on this, NY org for example, has both a Day and a Foundation org. These are two separate and distinct orgs and both are required to go SHS. Day org hours are generally 9am to 6pm Monday through Friday and Foundation Org hours are 6pm to 10pm Monday through Friday plus weekends. If these newer SHS orgs are only Foundation orgs, it allows for many of the staff to have a decent "moonlight" or full time money making job. In theory, if an Org is SHS. it is beyond the "make-break point" and can support it's staff with a decent wage. > > From what I've heard also, most of these SHS orgs start off as > missions. A lot of what a mission does is Div VI services and selling > books, neither of which requires a lot of training. I remember seeing > some video about some mission in some foreign country with what looked > like over a hundred staff. Someone told me later that pretty much > *all* that mission did was sell books. Exactly. Thanks for the continuing flow of good data Lulu. It really is appreciated. -- Cerridwen Lurking Scientologists start here: http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats This page was last updated on February 16, 2004 by Kristi Wachter. |